Grab a 100mm f2.8 macro - that will take BETTER shots than my 70-200 f2.8 for a third the price tag & you get macro too (I've also got one of them which I always use for model shoots when I can). Then you could grab a f1.8 50mm for a couple hundred and then maybe a wider prime. The resulting kit wouldn't be quite as flexible or light as your planned zooms but it'd be MUCH higher quality.
The reason why i don't consider non-zoom lenses is that I don't like cropping pictures, and it's sometimes necessary during photojournalism. While model photoshooting they would be more helpful. Like 50mm f/1.8 which is very cheap.
But maybe you're right and i should do more model shoots than documentary.
There are some famous lauded photojournalists that use fixed focus lenses and I know of one career National Geographic shooter that only EVER used the one fixed lens, a 24mm, everything he ever shot for NG was the same focal length. But yeah, I can see that journalism would be one field where the convenience of a zoom wins out over the slight loss in image quality.
Same with travel, I have my 70-200 primarily for travel and my next lens will be a 24-105 f4L IS. When I grab that I'll ditch my wide zoom and 50 prime that are currently in my travel kit. That way I'll have every focal length from 24-200mm covered with two lenses, both with IS.